Astoria Entertainment, Inc. v. Edwin W. Edwards

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-31204
ASTORIA ENTERTAINMENT, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
EDWIN W. EDWARDS, ET AL.,
Defendants,
EDWARD J. DEBARTOLO, JR.; ROBERT GUIDRY;
BOYD KENNER, INC.; LOUISIANA GAMING
ENTERPRISES, INC; BOYD LOUISIANA LLC;
CROWN GROUP, INC.; BOOMTOWN, INC.;
BOYD GAMING, INC.
Defendants-Appellants.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans
98-CV-3359-K
--------------------
January 7, 2003
Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellants appeal from the determination of the district
court that it would not exercise jurisdiction over state law
claims after dismissing all of the federal claims. When a matter
is still in the pleadings stages of litigation, the general rule

-- 1 of 2 --

2
is to dismiss pendant state claims if all the federal claims are
dismissed. See McClelland v. Gronwaldt, 155 F.3d 507, 519 (5th
Cir. 1998)(citing Wong v. Stripling, 881 F.2d 200, 204 (5th Cir.
1989)); cf. Batiste v. Island Records Inc., 179 F.3d 217, 227-28
(5th Cir. 1999) (holding that the district court did abuse its
discretion by dismissing pendant state law claims when the case
had moved beyond the pleadings, substantial discovery had taken
place, and trial was one month away). Here, it is undisputed
that no discovery has taken place in this matter and the
litigation is still in the pleadings stage. Given these
circumstances, we find that the district court did not abuse its
discretion. Accordingly, the determination of the district court
is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --